356 Herpetological Review 38(3), 2007

USA: FLORIDA: ALACHUA CO.: Gainesville: SR 121 N of inter-section with SR 24 (1911 SW 34th St.) (29°38'04.07"N, 82°22'15.55"W). 16 May 2007. Collected by Louis A. Somma. Verifiedby Kenneth L. Krysko, Florida Museum of Natural History, Uni-versity of Florida. One adult within a termite colony, beneath rock.UF 151211; additional specimens (UF 151212–14) were alsofound. All specimens were collected between 1200–1240 h at theDivision of Plant Industry (DPI), Florida Department of Agricul-ture and Consumer Services. In 2006, another adult R. braminuswas collected by an employee at this site, near a greenhouse, andwas kept in captivity until it escaped. Rhamphotyphlops is occa-sionally encountered by employees of DPI and it may be expand-ing its range, as there is one specimen (UF 147001) collected fromthe University of Florida campus (Powell Hall) adjacent to theDPI site (29°38'7.9080"N, 82°22'12.4320"W) on 10 May 2006,by J. Weber.

The first evidence of this species from Gainesville is an unpub-lished single specimen record (29°39'23.0761"N,82°22'33.0240"W), from November 1999, I. A. Minno (UF120116). The first published account referenced a specimen foundat the USDA lab on the University of Florida campus (Townsendet al. 2002. Herpetol. Rev. 33:75). While these specimens men-tioned here do not expand the range of this species, they establishthe presence of a population of R. braminus in Gainesville, AlachuaCo. This Southeast Asian, parthenogenic typhlopid has been col-lected from at least 17 counties in Florida (Ernst and Brown 2000.Herpetol. Rev. 31:256; Ernst and Ernst 2003. Snakes of the UnitedStates and Canada. Smithsonian Inst. Books, Washington, DC;Meshaka et al. 2004. The Exotic Amphibians and Reptiles ofFlorida. Krieger Publ. Co., Malabar, Florida; Krysko et al. 2005.Herpetol. Rev. 36:85–87).

Submitted by LOUIS A. SOMMA, Department of Zoology,PO Box 118525, 223 Bartram Hall, University of Florida,Gainesville, Florida 32611-8525, USA; e-mail: las@zoo.ufl.edu.

RAMPHOTYPHLOPS BRAMINUS (Brahminy Blindsnake).MÉXICO: OAXACA: Municipality of Villa de Tututepéc deMelchor Ocampo, Río Grande (16°00'45"N, 97°25'59"W), 29 melev. 03 January 2007. Martín Cruz Santiago. Verified by AdrianLeyte-Manrique. Colección Herpetológica del Centro deInvestigaciones Biológicas, Universidad Autónoma del Estado deHidalgo (CIB-CH1376). First record for the municipality and a205 km range extension S of the only other verified Oaxacan recordfrom Cuicatlán (Mendoza Quijano et al. 1994. Herpetol. Rev.25:34), which is located on the Gulf versant of the state. The clos-est known localities to this record are from adjacent Guerrero(Dixon and Hendricks 1979. Zool. Verh. 173:1–39). Literaturerecords indicate that this exotic species has become well estab-lished along the Pacific lowlands from Sinaloa (Dixon andHendricks, op. cit.), Jalisco (Dundee and Flores-Villela 1991.Herpetol. Rev. 22:26), Michoacán (Duellman 1965. Univ. KansasPubl. Mus. Nat. Hist. 15:629–709), Guerrero (Dixon andHendricks, op. cit.), into Oaxaca. Casas-Andreu (2004. In Garcia-Mendoza et al. [eds.], Biodiversidad de Oaxaca, pp. 375–390, Inst.Biol. UNAM, México, D.F.) indicated that this species occurs onthe Pacific coastal plain of Oaxaca, but cites no localities. Thesnake was found crawling on a street in the town of Río Grande.

Submitted by VICENTE MATA-SILVA, Department of Bio-

logical Sciences, University of Texas at El Paso, 500 West Av-enue, El Paso, Texas 79968, USA; AURELIO RAMIREZ-BAUTISTA, Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas, UniversidadAutónoma del Estado de Hidalgo, A.P. 1-69 Plaza Juárez, PachucaHidalgo, C.P. 42001, México; and JERRY D. JOHNSON, De-partment of Biological Sciences, University of Texas at El Paso,500 West Avenue, El Paso, Texas 79968, USA (e-mail:vmata@utep.edu).

RAMPHOTYPHLOPS BRAMINUS (Brahminy Blindsnake).USA: TEXAS: NACOGDOCHES CO.: Nacogdoches, 134 NorthChurch St. (31°36'13.38"N, 94°39'09.84"W). 29 July 2006. Will-iam B. Godwin. Verified by James R. Dixon. Texas CooperativeWildlife Collections, TCWC 91545. This is the second known lo-cality for this species in the state. New county record and secondstate record (Dixon 2000. Amphibians and Reptiles of Texas. Sec-ond Ed. Univ. of Texas A&M Press, viii + 421 pp.; J. R. Dixon,pers. comm.).

Submitted by WILLIAM B. GODWIN, Department of Biol-ogy, Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches, Texas75962, USA; DANIEL SAENZ, Wildlife Habitat and Silvicul-ture Laboratory, Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Ser-vice, Nacogdoches, Texas 75962, USA; and TOBY J. HIBBITTS,Texas Cooperative Wildlife Collections, Department of Wildlifeand Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University, 2258 Tamu, Col-lege Station, Texas 77843-2258, USA (e-mail:thibbitts@tamu.edu).

Herpetological Review, 2007, 38(3), 356–359.© 2007 by Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles

Discovery of an Introduced Population ofDiscoglossus pictus Beyond its Known

Distributional Range

MARC FRANCH1,2, 3

GUSTAVO A. LLORENTE1,2

ALBERT MONTORI1,2

ÀLEX RICHTER-BOIX1,2

andSALVADOR CARRANZA1

1 Departament de Biologia Animal (Vertebrats), Universitat de BarcelonaAv. Diagonal 645, 08028 Barcelona, Spain

2 Fundació EMYS. C. Sta. Coloma, 12; 17421 Riudarenes, Spain

3 Corresponding author; e-mail: franchky@ub.edu

The introduction of invasive species is, after habitat destruc-tion, the second most important cause of biodiversity loss on theplanet (Devine 1998; IUCN 2000; Mack et al. 2000). The mainproblems related to the introduction of invasive species are com-petition with local fauna, introduction of pathogens and geneticpollution of autochthonous populations (Elton 1958; Dodd andSeigel 1991; Butterfield et al. 1997; Arano et al. 1995; Manches-ter and Bullock 2000). According to one estimate, 39% of all knownextinctions that have taken place in the last 300 years have been asa result of the introduction of exotic species (Guijarro, 2001). Es-pecially injurious are the introductions of invasive species that

Herpetological Review 38(3), 2007 357

disperse well and adapt quickly to new environments (Sax andBrown 2000; Kolar and Lodge 2001).

Discoglossus pictus is a North African species that was intro-duced from Algeria to a small village in Continental Europe(Banyuls Sur Mer), approximately 100 years before present(Wintrebert 1908), and now has a continuous range extending >7,000 km2, from SW France to NE Iberia (Fig. 1) (Wintrebert 1908;Knoepffler 1962; Geniez and Cheylan 1987; Lanza 1989; Llorenteet al. 1995 and 1997; Barbadillo et al. 1999; Salvador and García-París 2001; Fradet and Geniez 2004; Montori et al. 2007). Newdata on the distribution of the introduced population of D. pictussuggest that it is extending its range at a similar rate to other am-phibians (Llorente et al. 1995 and 2002; Leblois et al. 2000;Montori et al. 2007). These studies indicate that populations haveprogressed within the province of Girona 60 km to the west and140 km to the south in the last century, being its southern expan-sion the most accentuated (Montori et al. 2007). This progress hasmoved the southern limit of the distribution range of D. pictus inIberia on the north of Barcelona province (Fig. 1).

In this study we report a recent introduction event ofDiscoglossus pictus in the Llobregat River Delta, 60 km south ofits present distribution range, and discuss the effects that this in-troduction might have on the local amphibian fauna, as well as thepossibility that this new population might act as a new focus ofdispersal towards the south.

This study was part of a larger project on the short and long-term ecological and biological impact that the creation of newinfrastructures has on the local amphibian fauna of the LlobregatRiver Delta (Llorente, 2005). Between 2004 and 2005, extensivefield surveys were carried out by means of habitat transects withconstant capture effort. All amphibian species could be easily iden-tified with the only exception of several specimens of the genusDiscoglossus found during the surveys. The genus Discoglossusincludes seven relatively similar species all found in the Mediter-ranean Basin: Discoglossus galganoi and D. jeannae, endemic tothe Iberian Peninsula, D. montalentii and D. sardus, endemic tothe Tyrrhenian islands, D. scovazzi endemic to North Africa, D.nigriventer endemic to Israel (probably extinct) and D. pictus,

found in North Africa, with introduced populations in continentalEurope and some Mediterranean islands (Zangreti et al. 2006;Fromhage et al. 2004). Fortunately, all seven species are easilydiagnosable through the comparison of the mitochondrial 16SrRNA gene region (Zangreti et al. 2006; Fromhage et al. 2004).

Genomic DNA was extracted from small non-invasive piecesof tissue from three specimens of Discoglossus sp. from theLLobregat Delta and from two specimens of Discoglossus pictusauritus from a population in Riudarenes, Girona province. Allsamples were processed following standard protocols describedin Carranza et al. (1999). Gene fragments were amplified by thepolymerase chain reaction (PCR) and were sequenced using thesame standard protocols and conditions as in Carranza et al. (1999,2000). Primers 16Sa 5’- CGC CTG TTT ATC AAA AAC AT-3’and 16Sb 5’-ACG TGA TCT GAG TTC AGA CCG G-3’ wereused in amplification and sequencing of approximately 558 basepairs (bp) of the 16S rRNA gene (Palumbi 1996). The 16S rRNAmtDNA sequences from the Llobregat Delta and the populationfrom Girona were aligned together with 16S rRNA sequences fromall seven extant species of Discoglossus downloaded from Genbank(AY333712 – AY333724; Fromhage et al. 2004) using ClustalX(Thompson et al. 1997) with default parameters (gap opening=10; gap extension = 0.2), and their sequences compared with thecomputer program PAUP* 4.0b10 (Swofford 1998).

The first observations of Discoglossus sp. in the Llobregat Deltaoccurred on 21 April 2004 at 41º17’15.71”N, 02º06’7.78”E (seeFig. 2). Other surveys carried out in 2004 near this location de-tected three new individuals and, in 2005, 11 individuals (twomales, eight females and one juvenile) and one breeding site withtadpoles and metamorphs were detected. The collected specimenswere housed in museological institution of the University ofBarcelona (Animal Biodiversity Resource Center - www.ub.es/

FIG. 1. Distribution of Discoglossus pictus in the western Mediterra-nean basin (left) and in the northeastern Iberian Peninsula (right). Theblack arrow shows the new 10 × 10 UTM (31T DF21) occupied by D.pictus.

FIG. 2. Specific localities (gray circles) known for Discoglossus pictusin the Llobregat River Delta. Breeding locality marked with a black circle.Reticulated areas represent prospected zones cover by the study.

358 Herpetological Review 38(3), 2007

crba/). All observations of D. pictus in the Llobregat River Deltawere close to water- in floodplains, drainage channels, and pools.The mitochondrial DNA sequence analysis of three specimens (seeabove) from the Llobregat Delta showed that all of them wereidentical in the 558 bp of 16S rRNA sequenced to the specimen ofDiscoglossus pictus auritus from Girona (the control population)and showed two differences with the sample of Discoglossus pictusauritus from France (Genbank accession number AY333723),which is also part of the population that was introduced into con-tinental Europe in the Nineteenth Century (Wintrebert 1908). Theseresults expand 60 km further south the known distribution rangeof D. pictus (Fig. 1), and suggest that this is probably another caseof human-mediated introduction. Two possible origins of intro-duced individuals are suggested. One is the indirect introductionby heavy machinery coming from northeast of Catalonia duringthe construction of new infrastructures in Delta. Second possibleorigin is voluntary introduction of individuals. In the surrounds ofBarcelona is usual to detect punctual introductions of herpetologicalspecies. For example Triturus marmoratus and Lissotritonhelveticus were cited in Barcelona Metropolitan Park out of hisdistribution range.

The Llobregat Delta is located within the potential distributionarea estimated by Montori et al. (2007) for this species. This willprobably facilitate the establishment of a large viable populationthat might serve as a springboard for future expansions to othersuitable habitats further south. We have verified that the specieshas been successfully reproducing in the Llobregat Delta, sinceseveral juveniles, metamorphs and tadpoles were found in this area.

This new introduced population implies the existence of a sec-ond centre of expansion that makes management of the speciesdifficult. Moreover, this area has experienced a substantial decreasein its amphibia diversity as a result of the recent disappearance ofthree species (Epidalea calamita, Bufo bufo and Pelobatescultripes) through habitat disturbance and deterioration of waterquality. Future surveys in this area will indicate if the range of thespecies is expanding and if it has been able to establish new popu-lations or, on the contrary, its dispersal has not progressing fur-ther. New metamorphs were detected during 2007 proving thepersistence of the new population

When the introduction of an allochtonous species takes place, itis important to monitor it from the beginning. This fact facilitatesthe planning of immediate management measures. The reason forconcluding the presence of Discoglossus pictus in the LlobregatDelta is the result of a human-mediated introduction and not natu-ral range expansion is due to the present expansion front of D.pictus in Catalonia is relatively far (60 km to the north), withoutintermediate populations. Although the Llobregat River Delta iswithin the calculated potential distribution range for this speciesin Catalonia (Llorente et al. 1995; Montori et al. 2007), at thepresent expansion rate estimated for D. pictus (1.53 km/year ± 0.8km – Montori et al., op. cit.), it would take approximately 30 yearsto disperse naturally to the Llobregat Delta from its closest popu-lations located in the northern limit of the Barcelona province (seeFig. 1).

Acknowledgments.—We are grateful to Pere Albornà, Sabina Artal, andDani Burgas for their help in this field survey. This work was funded bythe Departament de Medi Ambient, Generalitat de Catalunya, projectnumber: FBG302577. Scientific research permits were issued by the

Departament de Medi Ambient, Generalitat de Catalunya.

LITERATURE CITED

ARANO, B., G. A. LLORENTE, M. GARCÍA-PARÍS, AND P. HERRERO. 1995.Species translocation menaces Iberian waterfrogs. Biol. Conserv. 9:196–198.

BARBADILLO, L. J., J. I. LACOMBA, V. PÉREZ-MELLADO, V. SANCHO, AND L. F.LÓPEZ-JURADO. 1999. Anfibios y reptiles de la Península Ibérica, Balearesy Canarias. Editorial GeoPlaneta, Barcelona. 419 pp.

BUTTERFIELD, B. P., W. E. MESHAKA, AND C. GUYER. 1997. Nonindigenousamphibians and reptiles. In D. SIMBERLOFF, D. C. SCHMITZ AND T. C.BROWN (EDS.), Strangers in paradise: Impact and management ofnonindigenous species in Florida, pp. 123–138. Island Press, Washing-ton, D.C.

CARRANZA, S., E. N. ARNOLD, J. A. MATEO, AND L. F. LÓPEZ-JURADO. 2000.Long-distance colonization and radiation in gekkonid lizards, Tarentola(Reptilia, Gekkonidae), revealed by mitochondrial DNA sequences.Proc. R. Soc. B267:637–649.

––––––, ––––––, R. H. THOMAS, J. A. MATEO, AND L. F. LÓPEZ-JURADO.1999. Status of the extinct giant lacertid lizard Gallotia simonyi simonyi(Reptilia: Lacertidae) assessed using mtDNA sequences from museumspecimens. Herpetol. J. 9:83–86.

DEVINE, R. 1998. Alien Invasions. National Geographic Society, Wash-ington, D.C. 288 pp.

DODD, C. K., AND R. A. SEIGEL. 1991. Relocation, repatriation, and trans-location of amphibians and reptiles: Are they conservation strategiesthat work? Herpetologica 47:336–350.

ELTON, C. S. 1958. The ecology of invasions by animals and plants.Methuen and Co, London. 196 pp.

FRADET, V., AND P. GENIEZ. 2004. La répartition du Discoglosse peintDiscoglossus pictus Otth, 1837 (Amphibien, Anoure, Discoglossidés)dans le Sud de la France: note sur sa présence dans le département del’Hérault. Bull. Soc. Herp. France 109:35–41.

FROMHAGE, L., M. VENCES, AND M. VEITH. 2004. Testing alternativevicariance scenarios in Western Mediterranean discoglossid frogs. Mol.Phylogen. Evol. 31:308–322.

GENIEZ, P., AND M. CHEYLAN. 1987. Atlas de distribution des Reptiles etdes Amphibiens du Languedoc-Roussillon. Laboratoire deBiogéographie et Ecologie des Vertébrés, Montpellier. 114 pp.

GUIJARRO, L. 2001. La invasión silenciosa. Ambienta (Revista delMinisterio de Medio Ambiente) 1:33–37.

IUCN. 2000. IUCN guidelines for the prevention of biodiversity losscaused by alien invasive species. http://iucn.org./themes/ssc/pubs/policy/invasivesEng.htm

KNOEPFFLER, L. P. 1962. Contribution à l’étude du genre Discoglossus(Amphibiens, Anoures). Vie Milieu 13:1–94.

KOLAR, C. S., AND D. M. LODGE. 2001. Progress in invasion biology: pre-dicting invaders. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16 (4):199–204.

LANZA, B. 1989. Discoglossus pictus (Otth, 1837). Discoglosse peint. InJ. Castanet and R. Guyétant (eds.), Atlas de répartition des Amphibienset Reptiles de France, pp. 62–63. Société Herpétologique de France,Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle de Paris (Secrétariat de la Fauneet de la Flore), Ministère de l’Environnement (Direction de la Protec-tion de la Nature, Secrétariat d’État chargé de l’Environnement), Paris.

LEBLOIS, R., F. ROUSSET, D. TIKEL, C. MORITZ, AND A. ESTOUP. 2000. Absenceof evidence or isolation by distance in an expanding cane toad (Bufomarinus) population: an individual-based analysis of microsatellitegenotypes. Mol. Ecol. 9:1905–1909

LLORENTE, G.A. (COORD.) 2005. Seguiment de paràmetres biològics idetecció de bioindicadors de l’estat del sistema al llarg del període decreació de noves infrastructures al delta del Llobregat. Technical report.DMAH and Universitat de Barcelona. Barcelona. 548 pp.

––––––, A. MONTORI, X. SANTOS, AND M. A. CARRETERO. 2002. Discoglossuspictus. In J. M. Pleguezuelos, R. Márquez and M. Lizana (eds.), Atlas

Herpetological Review 38(3), 2007 359

y libro rojo de los anfibios y reptiles de España, pp. 91–93. DirecciónGeneral de Conservación de la Naturaleza-Asociación HerpetológicaEspañola.

––––––, ––––––, ––––––, AND ––––––. 1995. Atlas de distribució delsAnfibis y Rèptils de Catalunya y Andorra. Ed. Brau, Figueres. 192 pp.

––––––, ––––––, ––––––, AND ––––––. 1997. Discoglossus pictus. In J.M. Pleguezuelos (ed.), Distribución y biogeografía de los anfibios yreptiles en España y Portugal. Monografías de Herpetologia –Asociación Herpetológica Española 3:137–139.

MACK, R. N., D. SIMBERLOFF, W. M. LONDSDALE, H. EVANS, M. CLOUT, AND

F. A. BAZZAZ. 2000. Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, globalconsequences, and control. Ecol. Appl. 10:689–710.

MANCHESTER, S. J., AND J. M. BULLOCK. 2000. The impacts of non-nativespecies on UK biodiversity and the effectiveness of control. J. App.Ecol. 37:845–864.

MONTORI, A., G. A. LLORENTE, A. RICHTER-BOIX, D. VILLERO, M. FRANCH,AND N. GARRIGA. 2007. Colonización y efectos potenciales de la especieinvasora Discoglossus pictus sobre las especies nativas. Munibe. (Inpress).

PALUMBI, S. R. 1996. Nucleic acids II: the Polymerase Chain Reaction. InD. H. Hillis, C. Moritz, and K. B. Mabel (eds.), Molecular Systemat-ics, pp. 205–247. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, Massachusetts.

SALVADOR, A., AND M. GARCÍA-PARÍS. 2001. Anfibios Españoles.Identificación, Historia Natural y Distribución. Canseco Editores,Talavera de la Reina. 269 pp.

SAX, D. F., AND J. H. BROWN. 2000. The paradox of invasion. Glob. Ecol.Biogeog. 9:363–371.

SWOFFORD, D. L. 1998. PAUP: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony(and other methods), v 4.0. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massa-chusetts.

THOMPSON, J. D., T. J. GIBSON, F. PLEWNIAK, F. JEANMOURGIN, AND D. G.HIGGINS. 1997. The clustalX windows interface: flexible strategies formultiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. NucleicAcids Res. 24:4876–4882.

WINTREBERT, P. 1908. Quinzième Assemblée Générale Annuelle, Scéancedu 25 février 1908. Intervention de M. Wintrebert sur la présence àBanyuls-sur-Mer (Pyénées Orientales) du Discoglossus pictus Otth.Bull. Soc. Zool. France 33:54.

ZANGRETI, F., R. CIMMARUTA, AND G. NASCETTI. 2006. Genetic relation-ships of the western Mediterranean painted frogs based on allozymeand mitochondrial markers: evolutionary and taxonomic inferences(Amphibia, Anura, Discoglossidae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 87:515–536.

Herpetological Review, 2007, 38(3), 359.© 2007 by Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles

Range Extensions for Eight Species of Turtles inGasconade, Osage, and New Madrid Counties,

Missouri

ZACHARY W. FRATTOand

BRENNAN K. SWALLOWOpen Rivers and Wetlands Field Station, Missouri Department of Conservation

3815 East Jackson Boulevard, Jackson, Missouri 63755, USAe-mail: XXXXXXX

During a 2006 Wisconsin-type fyke net turtle exclusion devicestudy conducted in Gasconade, Osage, and New Madrid counties,Missouri, ten new county records for turtles were established. Thespecimens listed below represent the first reported occurrence ofthe species within the county listed. Turtles were photographed

and records were submitted to University of Missouri-Columbia(UMOC) collection. All voucher photographs were verified byJeffrey T. Briggler and catalogued into the collection. Except wherespecified all animals were captured by the authors. All recordswere found within the ranges predicted by Ernst et al. 1994.

Apalone mutica mutica (Midland Smooth Softshell). GASCONADE

CO: Gasconade River, Sec. 20 T44N R6W. 01 June 2006. UMOC1083P.

Apalone spinifera hartwegi (Western Spiny Softshell). OSAGE Co:Gasconade River, Sec. 34 T43N R7W. 19 May 2006. Collected byZach Fratto and Phil Pitts. UMOC 1073P.

Chelydra serpentina serpentina (Eastern Snapping Turtle). GAS-CONADE CO: Gasconade River, Sec. 20 T44N R6W. 01 June 2006.UMOC 1062P.

Graptemys ouachitensis ouachitensis. (Ouachita Map Turtle).GASCONADE CO: Gasconade River, Sec. 20 T44N R6W. 01 June2006. UMOC 1062P.

Graptemys pseudogeographica pseudogeographica (False MapTurtle). NEW MADRID CO: Donaldson Point Conservation Area, Sec.6 T22N R15E; Bottomland Hardwood Mississippi River flood-plain water body. 16 May 2006. University of Missouri-Colum-bia collection 1057P. GASCONADE CO: Gasconade River, Sec. 20T44N R6W. 01 June 2006. UMOC 1064P.

Pseudemys concinna concinna (Eastern River Cooter). GASCON-ADE CO: Gasconade River, Sec. 20 T44N R6W. 01 June 2006.UMOC 1068P.

Sternotherus odoratus (Stinkpot). OSAGE CO: Gasconade River,Sec. 31 T43N R7W. 14 June 2006. University of Missouri-Co-lumbia collection 1072P. GASCONADE CO: Gasconade River, Sec.22 T44N R6W. 28 June 2006. UMOC 1061P.

Trachemys scripta elegans (Red-eared Slider). GASCONADE CO:Gasconade River, Sec. 20 T44N R6W. 01 June 2006. UMOC1070P.

LITERATURE CITED

DANIEL, R. E., AND B. S. EDMOND. 2000. New and previously unreporteddistribution records of amphibians and reptiles in Missouri for 2000.Missouri Herpetol. Assoc. Newsl. (13):14–19.

––––––, AND ––––––. 2001. New and previously unreported distributionrecords of amphibians and reptiles in Missouri for 2001. MissouriHerpetol. Assoc. Newsl. (14):7–12.

––––––, ––––––, AND J.T. BRIGGLER. 2002. New and previously unreporteddistribution records of amphibians and reptiles in Missouri for 2002.Missouri Herpetol. Assoc. Newsl. (15):9–15.

––––––, ––––––, AND ––––––. 2003. New and previously unreported her-petological records from Missouri for 2003. Missouri Herpetol. Assoc.Newsl. (16):11–15.

––––––, ––––––, AND ––––––. 2004. New herpetological records fromMissouri for 2004. Missouri Herpetol. Assoc. Newsl. (17):9–12.

––––––, ––––––, AND ––––––. 2005. New herpetological records fromMissouri for 2005. Missouri Herpetol. Assoc. Newsl. (18):8–11.

ERNST, C. H., J. E. LOVICH, AND R. W. BARBOUR. 1994. Turtles of the UnitedStates and Canada. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.578 pp.

JOHNSON, T. R. 2000. The Amphibians and Reptiles of Missouri. MissouriDepartment of Conservation, Jefferson City. 400 pp.